One-year results of the ICON (Ionic versus non-ionic Contrast to Obviate worsening Nephropathy after angioplasty in chronic renal failure patients) Study.

Background: Long-term clinical outcomes after exposure to non-ionic iso-osmolar contrast medium (IOCM) or ionic low-osmolar CM (LOCM) in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) undergoing coronary angiography are unclear.

Methods: The ICON trial was a prospective, double-blinded, multicentre study that randomly assigned 146 patients with CKD undergoing coronary angiography with or without percutaneous coronary intervention to the non-ionic IOCM Iodixanol or the ionic LOCM Ioxaglate. We report the 1-year clinical outcomes.

Ionic low-osmolar versus nonionic iso-osmolar contrast media to obviate worsening nephropathy after angioplasty in chronic renal failure patients: the ICON (Ionic versus non-ionic Contrast to Obviate worsening Nephropathy after angioplasty in chronic renal failure patients) study.

Objectives: This randomized, prospective, double-blind, multicenter study compared nephrotoxicity of the nonionic iso-osmolar contrast media (CM) iodixanol versus the ionic low-osmolar CM ioxaglate in patients with chronic renal insufficiency undergoing coronary angiography.

Background: The properties of iodinated CM might contribute to the incidence of contrast-induced nephropathy (CIN).

Methods: Patients with renal impairment undergoing coronary angiography were randomly assigned to iodixanol (n = 72) or ioxaglate (n = 74).

Review of the 2005 American College of Cardiology, American Heart Association, and Society for Cardiovascular Interventions guidelines for adjunctive pharmacologic therapy during percutaneous coronary interventions: practical implications, new clinical data, and recommended guideline revisions.

In 2006, the American College of Cardiology, American Heart Association, and Society for Cardiovascular Interventions published the 2005 update of the evidence-based guidelines for the treatment of patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Together with procedural recommendations, these guidelines for percutaneous coronary intervention provide clinicians with guidance in the appropriate use of adjunctive pharmacologic therapy in patients undergoing PCI. However, there remain substantial variations in practice among clinicians and within and across institutions.

Real-world safety and efficacy of glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitors during percutaneous coronary intervention.

Background: Large randomized clinical trials have demonstrated differences in the efficacy and safety of glycoprotein (GP) IIb/IIIa inhibitors, but little has been published regarding comparisons of these agents in a "real-world" setting.

Purpose: This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of GP IIb/IIIa inhibitors in a large population of patients who underwent percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) during a 5-year period.

Methods: Patients undergoing PCI from 2000 through 2004 were eligible for inclusion if they received any single GP IIb/IIIa inhibitor.

Safety of concomitant therapy with eptifibatide and enoxaparin in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: results of the Coronary Revascularization Using Integrilin and Single bolus Enoxaparin Study.

Objectives: This study was designed to assess whether use of enoxaparin during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) increased bleeding compared with unfractionated heparin, in addition to background therapy with eptifibatide.

Background: Data supporting the benefits of enoxaparin and the glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor eptifibatide evolved in parallel. Information on combining these two classes of medications is limited.